SHASHIKANT PIRAJI SONAWANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant and one Smruti Achrekar were prosecuted on the allegation that they had committed offences punishable under section 7 and section 13(1)2) read with 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The learned Special Judge for Greater Bombay, by his judgment and order dated 27th February 2001, found the appellant (accused no.1 in the said case) guilty of the aforesaid offences, and sentenced him to suffer RI for 1(one) year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ - on each of the said two counts. The learned Special Judge, however, held the said Smt.Achrekar (accused no.2) not guilty and acquitted her. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and order convicting and sentencing him, and has therefore approached this Court by filing the present Appeal.

(2.) I have heard Mr.S.V. Kotwal, the learned counsel for the appellant. I have heard Mr.Deepak Thakre, learned APP for the State. With their assistance, I have gone through the entire record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence adduced during the trial and the impugned judgment.

(3.) The case of the prosecution, as put forth before the trial Court was as follows : - Momin Iliyaz Ahmed Hasanmiya (PW 1) had made an application to the Maharashtra Housing and Development Authority (MHADA) for allotment of one of the plots situate at Versova in response to an advertisement published by MHADA inviting applications for the allotment of plots, by eligible persons, under a scheme of the Government. The allotment was to be made by drawing of lots. Momin (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') was declared as one of the successful candidates. He was called upon to produce necessary documents, including a certificate showing that his name had been entered in the electoral roll of the year 1985. The complainant went to the office of the Tahsildar at Mulund on 12th June 1991 for obtaining the necessary certificate. There, he met the appellant and the said Smt.Achrekar - accused no.2. The complainant made a request to them for issuing the necessary certificate urgently. The appellant and the accused no.2 - Smt.Achrekar expressed their inability to issue the certificate urgently. Since the appellant said that he was busy, and plainly refused to issue the required certificate urgently, the complainant requested the accused no.2 to help him in the matter. The accused no.2 then told the complainant that he would have to pay Rs.200/ - to her and would have to pay, additionally, another Rs.200/ - to the appellant if the work was to be done immediately. She also informed the complainant that out of the said amount, Rs.100/ - would be paid to the Saheb who would sign the certificate. Since the accused no.2 refused to reduce the amount, the complainant agreed to pay the amount. He was then told to come on 14th June 1991 between 10.30 a.m to 11.00 a.m with Rs.400/ - and Rs.6/ - towards the official fee for issuing the certificate. The complainant did not want to pay the bribe and therefore, went to the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) on 13 th June 1991, and lodged a complaint which was recorded by PI Vilas Tupe (PW No.5). A case was registered against the appellant and the said accused no.2. A trap was arranged on the next day i.e. 14 th June 1991. Two panchas - Shri Anil Tambe (PW 2) and Deepak Choudhary were called at the ACB office in the morning. The complainant had also been asked to come to the ACB office in the morning. After the arrival of the complainant and the panchas, necessary arrangements were made for laying the trap by using Anthracin powder. Usual instructions i.e. that the money should be paid only on demand, were given to the complainant. The amount of Rs.400/ - that was produced by the complainant was divided into two parts of Rs.200/ - each, and both the bundles were kept in the left breast pocket of the shirt of the complainant. As per the arrangement, Anil Tambe (PW 2) was to be with the complainant. He was to observe the happenings and listen to the conversation. After the arrangements were done, the raiding party went to Mulund by the police van. The van was stopped at some distance from the Tahsildar office. The complainant and panch got down and went to the Tahsildar office. The complainant met the appellant and told him that he had come for taking the certificate. Things did not happen entirely as expected, but after some conversation had taken place between the complainant and the appellant, ultimately the appellant demanded and accepted the tainted amount of Rs.400/ -. The complainant, thereafter, gave the pre -determined signal, where -after the appellant was apprehended. The tainted amount was recovered from him. When examined under the ultra -violet rays, traces of Anthracin powder found on the fingers of the right hand, the thumb and index finger of the left hand, at the mouth and the inner side of left breast pocket of the shirt of the appellant, and at both the legs of the appellant's pant, near knees. The appellant as well as the accused no.2 were detained. The search of the accused no.2 was also taken, but no Anthracin powder was found on her hands or garments. After the post -trap panchnama was drawn, the complainant was taken to the Tahsildar who had, by that time, come to the office. Tahsildar issued the requisite certificate in favour of the complainant. Search of the house of the appellant and of the accused no.2 was taken.